ORDER

(Hybrid Mode)

18.03.2026:

Oral Judgment: Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma, Member (Judicial)

This company appeal could be referred to as to be the best example for an utmost malicious recourse adopted by the Appellant to abuse the process of law and judicial proceedings. The Appellant had neither been fair to the learned NCLT nor to this Appellate Tribunal even, in the manner and diligence with which the Appellant has taken the proceedings before the various Courts and the Tribunals.

2. The instant company appeal is accompanied with an application seeking condonation of delay in refiling, being IA No.416/2026. Looking into the grounds taken therein, the delay of 29 days as prayed for by the Appellant in refiling the company appeal would stand ‘condoned’. Accordingly, IA No.416/2026 would stand ‘allowed’.

3. The challenge in the instant company appeal, as given by the Appellant is to the impugned order dated 16.12.2025 as passed on IA(IBC)/922/CHE/2025 in CP(IB)/39(CHE)/2018, which is said to have been preferred to seek the following reliefs: -

“1. Declare that the admission of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) was illegal and obtained through fraudulent means.

2. Issue a